He’s a perfect example of how anti-progress progressives are. Nothing is good enough, so nothing is worth doing incrementally. Everyone is terrible, so why try. The US is the most racist country, and Israel shouldn’t have ever existed. Secular values are the best, but strongly support Islamist terrorists, because “US Bad”.
The man is clever and witty and a complete fool at the same time. What a waste of human intelligence.
I’m willing to give Stewart one more week. Maybe the backlash his opening has brought will get him to reconsider but his first guest coming from The Economist does not give me much hope
If that’s the approach he took on a matter of such importance, I’m beyond disappointed. It’s not like the Project 2025 material is secret. Perhaps his writers are too lazy to do research?
Here's the thing about Biden- I'll take 4 more years with this guy! A President who not only has
a remarkable brain and ain't afraid to use it, but is a bucket of energy. In spite of the obvious, the press, as we know, still wants a revenue generating horse race and I'll ignore that addiction for yet another four years. Biden is THE best President this Democracy has ever had. See that? That is a period.
Excellent take, thank you. Not dissimilar to everyone’s whose opinion I respect. I thought Stewart’s shtick was getting old before he retired. After he retired, I didn’t find anything he was doing to be all that interesting. I started wondering if it was mainly the writers for The Daily Show that I admired. Now, it’s like, WTF happened? Like Anderson Cooper. I think the answer is: money, status, corporate overlord paychecks, and entrenchment.
Everyone pretty much agrees that polling is broken (except the pollsters themselves, or those whose agenda it supports and then they’re usually cherry-picked). So, using that for any argument is flawed from the get-go. And the ageism is ridiculous, especially when TFG is so clearly “older” in cognitive terms, and when so many of the same people leveling that criticism were/are Bernie fans. Give me a break. It’s honestly remarkable what Biden has managed to accomplish after he was left a freaking mess on the scale of a frat party on angel dust times a Keith Moon hotel room “caper.”
Our cultural love affair with youth (something that is driven by profit, IMHO – young people buy more shit; old people already have their shit) really blinds us to the benefits of age in someone who is experienced and emotionally mature. Biden’s experience has not only helped us immeasurably on the international stage, he’s been crafty and skillful enough to get good legislation passed, even under tenuous circumstances, legislation that doesn’t just benefit the 0.01%. Not to mention the fact that he’s surrounded himself with knowledgeable and effective cabinet members.
Yeah, I would love for there to be a younger candidate with no baggage (ha) that everyone would rally around, but it’s too late for that now. And I don’t even know who that candidate would be at this point. I agree that the stakes are far too high for us to take gambles like that at this juncture. And Stewart is not helping. Acquired narcissism is a real occupational hazard for those who enjoy great success. And maybe it’s not acquired, who knows. At any rate, really disappointing. Thank you for your analysis, Bob. You summed it up well: “Democracy is a cliffhanger these days, and undermining the only party that’s acting like grownups right now, while breeding exasperation with the democratic process, will only help shove it over the ledge.” Yeah. That.
I watched his routine and was insulted by his “both sides” comparisons with tRump and Biden and the work he put into making Biden seem incompetent by taking the clips out of context. Stewart’s desire to be relevant undermined his ability to actually show true differences between the two. I was excited to see his return but disappointed in his need to appeal to everyone regardless the situation
He's always said he's "just a comedian" as a shield against criticism. I've always found that lazy; you and I, and he, all know he's doing political commentary. But he wanta to take shots and sit out. If you want to do that, ok. But don't act like the rest of us should find that the correct way about it.
Opting it because your morals are better than everyone else's is a surefire way to lose every time. politics isn't a game you can sit out and not lose; the "game" happens whether you play or not, and millions upon millions get affected by thr outcomes.
Comparatively, Stephen Corbet goes after the jugular and is comfortable in his own skin. Stewart pulls his punches and has always felt to me like he just wants to be liked.
To be a little apologetic for Stewart, if you didn’t tune out early, and watched the interview with the woman from the Economist, he actually pushed back, making the argument that if Biden had actual problems, one of the dozens of reporters and staffers would have leaked *something*; but there’s been *nothing*. Reconciling that with his opening monologue was difficult.🤔😉😊
Thank you thank you for this . I felt as if i had lost my mind, did i really hear Stewart equate trumpf and Biden??? My mind was blown, I've told my liberal friends how disgusted i was . In the past, I've admired Stewart for his tireless, powerful defense of our veterans. Now??? The worst part is that he is an influencer, what the hell is he thinking?? How about his producers?
Makes me even more fearful of our future, of our very democracy.. could be the END. Lord help us
"There’s a very real possibility that other anti-Trump undesirables, perhaps even members of the news media – the “enemies of people” – will be caught up in Trump’s purge" Two words: Julian Assange
Irrelevant tangent, Bob. The main point of Stewart’s “rant”, since we already know how much he hates Trump, is that Democrats’ willful blindness to Biden’s obvious frailties and Biden’s failure to “groom a successor” or even allow prominent Democrats to mount a challenge, has led us to a situation now where we will indeed face another Trump presidency because of Biden’s negligence.
What makes you believe that Biden stepping down to be replaced by an unknown, nationally untested successor about whom the Republicans might have oppo research more damning than being 81 years old will actually turn out well for the Democrats? Give me one example, please, of something like that working out for the incumbent's party.
Here’s my plan. “Jon Stewart Democrats” - millions of us - should vote in our state and local elections for all the usual State and local Democrats but then decline to vote for Biden; leave the space blank as a Vote of No Confidence in Biden (or write-in some well known Democrat, if one’s state voting laws permit that). If enough people do that, Biden can be persuaded to renounce his candidacy and have a normal campaign for others leading up to an Open convention in July. I realize it’s hard to do something like this in short order, but consider something like the speed with which people were able to respond to an event like Pearl Harbor. If all of this refusal to vote for Biden in the primaries doesn’t convince him to withdraw his candidacy, JS Democrats will really have to start a Third Party in short order, a third party that doesn’t have an “outsider” at the helm, instead a major Democratic Governor or Senator. (The pressing problem there, of course, is that like the “silent” Trump-enablers in the Republican Party, you have a similar situation among Democrats where major Democrats have to end their silence and start speaking out and taking action. Once this third party (Young Democratic Party? New Democratic Party?) gets off the ground, it will basically run a “challenge” campaign against the Biden Democratic Party. This new party would agree to cease its campaign if polling showed that Biden Democrats still showed a substantial lead over them. Of course Biden Democrats would have to agree to the same ground rules about withdrawing their candidate, and that will be the tough hump to get over.
Good lord, stop. You're wasting your time. I ask again: show me one example from all of American history when ditching the incumbent has worked out for his party. Just one. Show me.
Fine, then, I guess we’re likely just stuck with a situation where Biden has about a ten percent chance of prevailing in November, and yet Biden Democrats refuse to pull their heads out of the sand and consider alternatives. You do realize that this is all Biden’s fault that we are in the predicament we’re in because of his refusal to groom a successor after a one-term presidency?
Check the polling on how a “generic Democrat” would do against Trump - they’d be a 13-point favorite. Biden, OTOH, is a 1.9 point underdog, and that doesn’t even account for the fact that Democratic Presidential candidates need to prevail by three to four points in the General Election to eke out a vote in the Electoral College.
"Generic Democrat" = no record, no votes, no scandals, no negatives. That's why "generic candidates" always do better in polling than actual human beings. Speaking of which, you're basing your assumptions on increasingly inaccurate polling. In every recent election, Democrats have consistently overperformed the polling. Therefore you should base your forecasting on actual election data.
And since you refuse, I'll say it: replacing the incumbent has historically led to the incumbent's party losing in November and, in this case, the inevitable return of the "Democrats in disarray" meme. The sooner you drop this fiction and own the reality that, like always, the incumbent will be re-nominted, the sooner we can get on with unifying around the business destroying Trump.
In every election cycle, I always initially root for "Unknown Democrat/Republican" (Unknown D/R). Have you ever met him? I have. He's so cool. He (it's always a dude) is such an awesome candidate. Loyal, semi-professional wife. Two point five kids (I haven't asked). He's pro-choice AND pro-life. He puts in minimum face time at these country club soiriees but honestly prefers spending his down time at a bar like Cheers.
There's just one problem. Unknown D/R NEVER RUNS! Breaks my heart every four years.
“Biden has about a ten percent chance of prevailing in November”.
See, that’s the key fallacy in your perspective. If I agreed with that, I might think you had a case. But I don’t, and you don’t.
Bob Costas on Bill Maher (who had been asserting that TFG “won’t leave” for years) last Friday made a similar argument. He actually used 1968 as an example, when LBJ dropped out after losing a primary to Gene McCarthy. But what happened in the wake of that decision? Bobby Kennedy got killed, the convention was a televised disaster, in the arena and out, and Richard fucking Nixon beat Humphrey, even with Wallace taking 48 electoral votes, presumably from Nixon. As Dr Fool would say, “How’d that work out for you?” 🤔😉😊
My ten percent comment isn’t based on present circumstances - it’s really hard to know just what the odds are now. But it still really doesn’t look encouraging - most polls show Biden trailing Trump badly in important swing states. My ten per center pessimism is based on the fact that, whatever one’s assessment of Biden’s current frailty issues is, he’s clearly on a downward slope, and either something catastrophic could happen by November, or he just becomes more and more worn down to the point where people really do sense that he faces major “neurological” (or whatever one wants to call them) challenges. Too many things could go south in his candidacy between now and November. And of course, one of people’s main fears about Biden’s fitness for the job (and indeed, the wisdom of voting for him, among the undecided) is that the highly unpopular Kamala Harris is waiting in the wings to take over should that become necessary.
OFFS, great idea. Sabotage the general election chances for the guy who beat Trump once already, because what you feel is more important than what the consequences are for the rest of us.
It’s truly amazing how if one looks into what might be called the intelligent YouTuber podcast space, my opinions on this subject are widely shared, especially among young lefty Democrats (and, it seems, younger people in general) and also many Europeans. I’m astonished that everyone in this space is behaving this way. Frankly you’re really in a bubble and it’s really quite astonishing to behold.
IMHO (and as a Canadian observing this) the Europeans need to butt the frak out; they're just indulging in schadenfreude when they comment at The Medias Touch YouTube channel and at Farron Cousins' YouTube channels anyway. I comment at those places too, but I don't comment there to be a schadenfreude-like asshole tutt-tutting Americans about how to handle Trump or how to vote.
If you seriously think that setting up a third party's going to solve your problems (love how you took the name of the actual New Democratic Party [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Democratic_Party] here in Canada for the name of your party🙄) you're drinking some very potent moonshine (and no, I don't want to consume it!) Setting up an actual party takes time and HARD WORK, something that emoprogressives like you are not known to be able to accomplish.
For the love of all that's rational and sane, stop trying to split the vote, deal with REALITY and NOT fantasy, and accept that the ONLY way of stopping fascism now (as in '16) is to vote blue.
Would anybody here be able to provide any video links from Joe Biden’s prime that show him “stuttering”? Everything I’ve been able to find shows someone who was always a very forthright and forceful speaker who never stuttered.
"Show a video of Joe Biden stuttering"!?! Joe Biden mastered his stutter as a child. He didn't even run for office until five months before I was born in 1973. He was born in 1942 and according to Wikipedia he found ways to overcome his stutter in his twenties. ( Biden, Joseph R. Jr. (July 9, 2009). "Letter to National Stuttering Association chairman" (PDF). National Stuttering Association. Archived from the original (PDF) on July 28, 2011. Retrieved December 9, 2010.)
That means he had found a way to overcome his stuttering before his run for office in 1973 and the first home portable video camera was released in 1967. Sorry we can't independently verify his speech impediment to your satisfaction! Dope.
Uhhhh….you’ve entirely missed my point. I was pointing out that, indeed, Biden had overcome his stuttering by the time he was an adult, yet people defending Biden’s current speech problems continue to attribute it to his “stuttering problem”. I’m maintaining it’s actually a *slurring* problem, and thus is of much more concern than if it was truly just a stuttering problem. My challenge was for anyone claiming Biden currently had a “stuttering” problem to show me any videos of where he stuttered during his prime, precisely because I strongly doubt any such videos exist, and thus Biden-defenders should stop using the “stuttering” defense for his current speech problem, which is actually a *slurring” problem.
Now tell me again: Who’s being the actual “Dope” here?
I couldn't disagree with you more, sir. Disgusting ageism has no place in our society, like misogyny, racism, hatred of the LGBTQ community, etc., Many comics "too cool for school" fears, self-consciousness and cynical attitudes are beyond stale. It requires no creativity. And the projections by these comics quite frankly, are glaringly embarrassing.
“It is no measure of health to be well-adjusted to profoundly sick societies”.
"A blind man accuses the world of darkness"
Darkness is not the opposite of light; darkness is the absence of light. Hate is not the opposite of love; hate is the absence of love. Evil is not the opposite of good; evil is the absence of good. Ignorance is not the opposite of wisdom; ignorance is the absence of wisdom.
And last...Paraphrasing James Beacham, (CERN experimental high-energy particle physicist):
...."When We Ask Questions About the Universe Around Us, You and I are the Method by Which the Universe Asks Questions About Itself"....
Ageism? LOL. So you would be ok if Biden was 95? There are definitely things that i do not do as well today as i did 20 years ago precisely because of my age. I guess it's "ageism" when a 75 year old man is not considered for a position in the NFL?
You are biased. If a 95 year old republican was running for president and he made several gaffs, such as calling Ukraine Mexico or continuing to insist that he saw non-existent pictures of beheaded babies, you would be writing articles warning everyone of the dangers of electing such a crochety old man. Of course, that's just speculation on my part, as most of this article is basically speculation on your part.
I don't see frailties. Just the age is absolutely, completely irrelevant measure unless we have good evidence the person will die a month after election. Policy is what matters to me, I mean, what other fuhqin purpose is there for the president, and if it's a 5000 yo space alien, I don't care, it's not an opera. It would matter if this is all a show to you, in which case you're either a trumptile, or a gazzza-wailer, or a cynical 1 - 15 percenter - plenty of those around.
How nuts! Biden is the best president since FDR, so what's obvious is the presidency is not very consequential to you.
He’s a perfect example of how anti-progress progressives are. Nothing is good enough, so nothing is worth doing incrementally. Everyone is terrible, so why try. The US is the most racist country, and Israel shouldn’t have ever existed. Secular values are the best, but strongly support Islamist terrorists, because “US Bad”.
The man is clever and witty and a complete fool at the same time. What a waste of human intelligence.
I’m willing to give Stewart one more week. Maybe the backlash his opening has brought will get him to reconsider but his first guest coming from The Economist does not give me much hope
If that’s the approach he took on a matter of such importance, I’m beyond disappointed. It’s not like the Project 2025 material is secret. Perhaps his writers are too lazy to do research?
“If your guy loses, bad things might happen, but the country is not over." That’s when I lost it. I’m sorry, Jon, open your fucking eyes. 🤔😉😊
This is exactly the way I’ve seen Stewart. He plays around the edges. Call it what it is. Nicely put. Bob.
Here's the thing about Biden- I'll take 4 more years with this guy! A President who not only has
a remarkable brain and ain't afraid to use it, but is a bucket of energy. In spite of the obvious, the press, as we know, still wants a revenue generating horse race and I'll ignore that addiction for yet another four years. Biden is THE best President this Democracy has ever had. See that? That is a period.
Excellent take, thank you. Not dissimilar to everyone’s whose opinion I respect. I thought Stewart’s shtick was getting old before he retired. After he retired, I didn’t find anything he was doing to be all that interesting. I started wondering if it was mainly the writers for The Daily Show that I admired. Now, it’s like, WTF happened? Like Anderson Cooper. I think the answer is: money, status, corporate overlord paychecks, and entrenchment.
Everyone pretty much agrees that polling is broken (except the pollsters themselves, or those whose agenda it supports and then they’re usually cherry-picked). So, using that for any argument is flawed from the get-go. And the ageism is ridiculous, especially when TFG is so clearly “older” in cognitive terms, and when so many of the same people leveling that criticism were/are Bernie fans. Give me a break. It’s honestly remarkable what Biden has managed to accomplish after he was left a freaking mess on the scale of a frat party on angel dust times a Keith Moon hotel room “caper.”
Our cultural love affair with youth (something that is driven by profit, IMHO – young people buy more shit; old people already have their shit) really blinds us to the benefits of age in someone who is experienced and emotionally mature. Biden’s experience has not only helped us immeasurably on the international stage, he’s been crafty and skillful enough to get good legislation passed, even under tenuous circumstances, legislation that doesn’t just benefit the 0.01%. Not to mention the fact that he’s surrounded himself with knowledgeable and effective cabinet members.
Yeah, I would love for there to be a younger candidate with no baggage (ha) that everyone would rally around, but it’s too late for that now. And I don’t even know who that candidate would be at this point. I agree that the stakes are far too high for us to take gambles like that at this juncture. And Stewart is not helping. Acquired narcissism is a real occupational hazard for those who enjoy great success. And maybe it’s not acquired, who knows. At any rate, really disappointing. Thank you for your analysis, Bob. You summed it up well: “Democracy is a cliffhanger these days, and undermining the only party that’s acting like grownups right now, while breeding exasperation with the democratic process, will only help shove it over the ledge.” Yeah. That.
I watched his routine and was insulted by his “both sides” comparisons with tRump and Biden and the work he put into making Biden seem incompetent by taking the clips out of context. Stewart’s desire to be relevant undermined his ability to actually show true differences between the two. I was excited to see his return but disappointed in his need to appeal to everyone regardless the situation
He's always said he's "just a comedian" as a shield against criticism. I've always found that lazy; you and I, and he, all know he's doing political commentary. But he wanta to take shots and sit out. If you want to do that, ok. But don't act like the rest of us should find that the correct way about it.
Opting it because your morals are better than everyone else's is a surefire way to lose every time. politics isn't a game you can sit out and not lose; the "game" happens whether you play or not, and millions upon millions get affected by thr outcomes.
Amen! You nailed it! I highly concur. He's always been that way. 👍
I absolutely have the same fears, and no, I don't think that what you've described is hyperbole at all.
Comparatively, Stephen Corbet goes after the jugular and is comfortable in his own skin. Stewart pulls his punches and has always felt to me like he just wants to be liked.
To be a little apologetic for Stewart, if you didn’t tune out early, and watched the interview with the woman from the Economist, he actually pushed back, making the argument that if Biden had actual problems, one of the dozens of reporters and staffers would have leaked *something*; but there’s been *nothing*. Reconciling that with his opening monologue was difficult.🤔😉😊
He’ll also kill Obamacare by Executive Order and the SC will allow it
Thank you thank you for this . I felt as if i had lost my mind, did i really hear Stewart equate trumpf and Biden??? My mind was blown, I've told my liberal friends how disgusted i was . In the past, I've admired Stewart for his tireless, powerful defense of our veterans. Now??? The worst part is that he is an influencer, what the hell is he thinking?? How about his producers?
Makes me even more fearful of our future, of our very democracy.. could be the END. Lord help us
"There’s a very real possibility that other anti-Trump undesirables, perhaps even members of the news media – the “enemies of people” – will be caught up in Trump’s purge" Two words: Julian Assange
Irrelevant tangent, Bob. The main point of Stewart’s “rant”, since we already know how much he hates Trump, is that Democrats’ willful blindness to Biden’s obvious frailties and Biden’s failure to “groom a successor” or even allow prominent Democrats to mount a challenge, has led us to a situation now where we will indeed face another Trump presidency because of Biden’s negligence.
What makes you believe that Biden stepping down to be replaced by an unknown, nationally untested successor about whom the Republicans might have oppo research more damning than being 81 years old will actually turn out well for the Democrats? Give me one example, please, of something like that working out for the incumbent's party.
Here’s my plan. “Jon Stewart Democrats” - millions of us - should vote in our state and local elections for all the usual State and local Democrats but then decline to vote for Biden; leave the space blank as a Vote of No Confidence in Biden (or write-in some well known Democrat, if one’s state voting laws permit that). If enough people do that, Biden can be persuaded to renounce his candidacy and have a normal campaign for others leading up to an Open convention in July. I realize it’s hard to do something like this in short order, but consider something like the speed with which people were able to respond to an event like Pearl Harbor. If all of this refusal to vote for Biden in the primaries doesn’t convince him to withdraw his candidacy, JS Democrats will really have to start a Third Party in short order, a third party that doesn’t have an “outsider” at the helm, instead a major Democratic Governor or Senator. (The pressing problem there, of course, is that like the “silent” Trump-enablers in the Republican Party, you have a similar situation among Democrats where major Democrats have to end their silence and start speaking out and taking action. Once this third party (Young Democratic Party? New Democratic Party?) gets off the ground, it will basically run a “challenge” campaign against the Biden Democratic Party. This new party would agree to cease its campaign if polling showed that Biden Democrats still showed a substantial lead over them. Of course Biden Democrats would have to agree to the same ground rules about withdrawing their candidate, and that will be the tough hump to get over.
Good lord, stop. You're wasting your time. I ask again: show me one example from all of American history when ditching the incumbent has worked out for his party. Just one. Show me.
This guy is now suggesting that Biden's lifelong issue with stuttering is made up, so I think we're just dealing with a chaos commenter.
https://thebanter.substack.com/p/jon-stewart-is-wrong-about-another/comment/49627564
Fine, then, I guess we’re likely just stuck with a situation where Biden has about a ten percent chance of prevailing in November, and yet Biden Democrats refuse to pull their heads out of the sand and consider alternatives. You do realize that this is all Biden’s fault that we are in the predicament we’re in because of his refusal to groom a successor after a one-term presidency?
Check the polling on how a “generic Democrat” would do against Trump - they’d be a 13-point favorite. Biden, OTOH, is a 1.9 point underdog, and that doesn’t even account for the fact that Democratic Presidential candidates need to prevail by three to four points in the General Election to eke out a vote in the Electoral College.
"Generic Democrat" = no record, no votes, no scandals, no negatives. That's why "generic candidates" always do better in polling than actual human beings. Speaking of which, you're basing your assumptions on increasingly inaccurate polling. In every recent election, Democrats have consistently overperformed the polling. Therefore you should base your forecasting on actual election data.
And since you refuse, I'll say it: replacing the incumbent has historically led to the incumbent's party losing in November and, in this case, the inevitable return of the "Democrats in disarray" meme. The sooner you drop this fiction and own the reality that, like always, the incumbent will be re-nominted, the sooner we can get on with unifying around the business destroying Trump.
In every election cycle, I always initially root for "Unknown Democrat/Republican" (Unknown D/R). Have you ever met him? I have. He's so cool. He (it's always a dude) is such an awesome candidate. Loyal, semi-professional wife. Two point five kids (I haven't asked). He's pro-choice AND pro-life. He puts in minimum face time at these country club soiriees but honestly prefers spending his down time at a bar like Cheers.
There's just one problem. Unknown D/R NEVER RUNS! Breaks my heart every four years.
“Biden has about a ten percent chance of prevailing in November”.
See, that’s the key fallacy in your perspective. If I agreed with that, I might think you had a case. But I don’t, and you don’t.
Bob Costas on Bill Maher (who had been asserting that TFG “won’t leave” for years) last Friday made a similar argument. He actually used 1968 as an example, when LBJ dropped out after losing a primary to Gene McCarthy. But what happened in the wake of that decision? Bobby Kennedy got killed, the convention was a televised disaster, in the arena and out, and Richard fucking Nixon beat Humphrey, even with Wallace taking 48 electoral votes, presumably from Nixon. As Dr Fool would say, “How’d that work out for you?” 🤔😉😊
My ten percent comment isn’t based on present circumstances - it’s really hard to know just what the odds are now. But it still really doesn’t look encouraging - most polls show Biden trailing Trump badly in important swing states. My ten per center pessimism is based on the fact that, whatever one’s assessment of Biden’s current frailty issues is, he’s clearly on a downward slope, and either something catastrophic could happen by November, or he just becomes more and more worn down to the point where people really do sense that he faces major “neurological” (or whatever one wants to call them) challenges. Too many things could go south in his candidacy between now and November. And of course, one of people’s main fears about Biden’s fitness for the job (and indeed, the wisdom of voting for him, among the undecided) is that the highly unpopular Kamala Harris is waiting in the wings to take over should that become necessary.
OFFS, great idea. Sabotage the general election chances for the guy who beat Trump once already, because what you feel is more important than what the consequences are for the rest of us.
It’s truly amazing how if one looks into what might be called the intelligent YouTuber podcast space, my opinions on this subject are widely shared, especially among young lefty Democrats (and, it seems, younger people in general) and also many Europeans. I’m astonished that everyone in this space is behaving this way. Frankly you’re really in a bubble and it’s really quite astonishing to behold.
Why am I not surprised you are ignoring that I already told you to stuff a sock in it?
IMHO (and as a Canadian observing this) the Europeans need to butt the frak out; they're just indulging in schadenfreude when they comment at The Medias Touch YouTube channel and at Farron Cousins' YouTube channels anyway. I comment at those places too, but I don't comment there to be a schadenfreude-like asshole tutt-tutting Americans about how to handle Trump or how to vote.
If you seriously think that setting up a third party's going to solve your problems (love how you took the name of the actual New Democratic Party [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Democratic_Party] here in Canada for the name of your party🙄) you're drinking some very potent moonshine (and no, I don't want to consume it!) Setting up an actual party takes time and HARD WORK, something that emoprogressives like you are not known to be able to accomplish.
For the love of all that's rational and sane, stop trying to split the vote, deal with REALITY and NOT fantasy, and accept that the ONLY way of stopping fascism now (as in '16) is to vote blue.
Would anybody here be able to provide any video links from Joe Biden’s prime that show him “stuttering”? Everything I’ve been able to find shows someone who was always a very forthright and forceful speaker who never stuttered.
In fact that was one of his most attractive features, how handsome and what a flawless speaker he was - he had intense charisma.
"Show a video of Joe Biden stuttering"!?! Joe Biden mastered his stutter as a child. He didn't even run for office until five months before I was born in 1973. He was born in 1942 and according to Wikipedia he found ways to overcome his stutter in his twenties. ( Biden, Joseph R. Jr. (July 9, 2009). "Letter to National Stuttering Association chairman" (PDF). National Stuttering Association. Archived from the original (PDF) on July 28, 2011. Retrieved December 9, 2010.)
That means he had found a way to overcome his stuttering before his run for office in 1973 and the first home portable video camera was released in 1967. Sorry we can't independently verify his speech impediment to your satisfaction! Dope.
Uhhhh….you’ve entirely missed my point. I was pointing out that, indeed, Biden had overcome his stuttering by the time he was an adult, yet people defending Biden’s current speech problems continue to attribute it to his “stuttering problem”. I’m maintaining it’s actually a *slurring* problem, and thus is of much more concern than if it was truly just a stuttering problem. My challenge was for anyone claiming Biden currently had a “stuttering” problem to show me any videos of where he stuttered during his prime, precisely because I strongly doubt any such videos exist, and thus Biden-defenders should stop using the “stuttering” defense for his current speech problem, which is actually a *slurring” problem.
Now tell me again: Who’s being the actual “Dope” here?
Well .....
I couldn't disagree with you more, sir. Disgusting ageism has no place in our society, like misogyny, racism, hatred of the LGBTQ community, etc., Many comics "too cool for school" fears, self-consciousness and cynical attitudes are beyond stale. It requires no creativity. And the projections by these comics quite frankly, are glaringly embarrassing.
“It is no measure of health to be well-adjusted to profoundly sick societies”.
"A blind man accuses the world of darkness"
Darkness is not the opposite of light; darkness is the absence of light. Hate is not the opposite of love; hate is the absence of love. Evil is not the opposite of good; evil is the absence of good. Ignorance is not the opposite of wisdom; ignorance is the absence of wisdom.
And last...Paraphrasing James Beacham, (CERN experimental high-energy particle physicist):
...."When We Ask Questions About the Universe Around Us, You and I are the Method by Which the Universe Asks Questions About Itself"....
Ageism? LOL. So you would be ok if Biden was 95? There are definitely things that i do not do as well today as i did 20 years ago precisely because of my age. I guess it's "ageism" when a 75 year old man is not considered for a position in the NFL?
If he's capable of doing the work, as Biden has proved, yes of course.
You are biased. If a 95 year old republican was running for president and he made several gaffs, such as calling Ukraine Mexico or continuing to insist that he saw non-existent pictures of beheaded babies, you would be writing articles warning everyone of the dangers of electing such a crochety old man. Of course, that's just speculation on my part, as most of this article is basically speculation on your part.
Okay….whatever.
I don't see frailties. Just the age is absolutely, completely irrelevant measure unless we have good evidence the person will die a month after election. Policy is what matters to me, I mean, what other fuhqin purpose is there for the president, and if it's a 5000 yo space alien, I don't care, it's not an opera. It would matter if this is all a show to you, in which case you're either a trumptile, or a gazzza-wailer, or a cynical 1 - 15 percenter - plenty of those around.
How nuts! Biden is the best president since FDR, so what's obvious is the presidency is not very consequential to you.